Editorial: Why real-time social environments will never return.

"The technology is there and, at last, the right psychology is in place that will make these services explode. And I, for one, welcome our new avatar overlords." A formidable conclusion in a Mashable editorial on the subject.

But I, for one, sees some major flaws in this most vicarious of conclusions. The likes of Habbo Hotel in the late 90s became a success because we weren't aware of what social networking could be defined as. In that vain, we tried to recreate virtual worlds, go to virtual parties, take part in virtual diving competitions and spend our weekly phone credit on credits for virtual sofas (cool Habbo references bro). However, we are no longer 12, so even if there was a virtual world renaissance we wouldn't be part of it, and neither do the new generations alike. The psychology isn't what they claim it to be. True, the populous wants to be social, so social media now has a definition: it's an extension of our communication and active participation, not a digital recreation of your digital life.

They are correct in one respect, we have been heading in a ubiquitous direction through Geocities, Friendster and Myspace, then to Facebook and Twitter; but the next steps are not social environments. This ideology is reserved for games: something with a causality, a story and a conclusion. It doesn't belong and won't happen in the future of the chain of progression in social networking.

Simply put, it's too much of a pointless entity and requires too much attention and contribution to exist. Look at Facebook gifts and the Playstation Home, then say that social environments will return to conquer.

Jason England

I am the Founder and Editor-in-chief of New Rising Media. You can follow me on Twitter @MrJasonEngland.

Virtual Reality Is Not The Future Of Social Media - Facebook Just Proved It

One tone-deaf VR cartoon tour of the Puerto Rico devastation has proven that virtual reality and social networking do not mix. There’s only so much social media based over-complication that we humans can take.

Money Is The Death Of Social Media

Do you ever get the feeling when talking to someone unaware of the concept of a socially connected online world (the Grandmother in my example), that they just don't understand the value of social media? The idea, while seeming wholly legitimate to yourself just seems preposterous to them, no matter how much you demonstrate or present.

This sort of thing happens on the trading floors of NASDAQ as well; but the interpretation is quite the opposite, as you've probably seen from the tumbling stock price of Facebook, since Zuckerberg rang the bell. As investors look upon a social network they don't see community, they see influence and a possible return on their investment. This is a fair enough analysis of the situation, anybody would want to see their money returned with extra; but in the grand scheme of things it's a fatal blow to the very product they're investing in.

Editorial: Google+ is not a social media game changer

Google+ has an obvious advantage in search results, presents unique opportunities for brands and is backed by deep pockets, he argues. And all of these factors make it a social media platform that will stick around in a big way.

In respects, his argument for the social network succeeding make sense. Comparing it to Facebook at such an early stage in development is the equivalent of comparing the aforementioned to Myspace back in 2006: it's still rather early days, and has a lot of changes to undergo. But in it's current state, Brogan pointed out the crucial flaw with Google+ through via one of his points deemed as a positive.

And we also know, as the BBC reports, that Twitter isn't such a fan of this integration by Google, going so far as to say it is a "bad day for the internet." These comments have been made for the public facing reason of Twitter being a source of real-time information, which should be there for the user who wants the most relevant and up-to-date content. The more behind-the-scenes reasoning probably relates to their network not taking any precedence on the search, due to their partnership with Google ending quite a while ago.

Social networking strops aside, points have been made on both sides, and it's why I think Google's expanded social search isn't the best idea they've come up with, for both non-users and users of Google+. It's not going to benefit the people because it contradicts the foundation of such an impactful product as search. It does this in two ways.

Editorial: Twitter Is Not A Social Network

So Twitter CEO Dick Costolo sat down for a conversation with All Things D's Peter Kafka at D: Dive Into Media on Monday night. They discuss the recent outrage against Google's 'Search plus your world.' However, in his calm response, he answers another question we've been asking: exactly how will Twitter be defined?